Editorial: Give MGM, at very least, a seat at the table

Published 6:10 pm, Monday, September 18, 2017

For argument’s sake, let’s say the MGM Resorts International proposal for a casino and entertainment center in Bridgeport is not such a great idea.

It’s pitched as a $650 million — all private money — extravaganza that will create 2,000 jobs and spawn another 5,000, shoot a one-time $50 million license fee into the arm of a gasping state budget, along with an estimated $300 million state gaming tax beginning in 2019.

Let’s say that creating a world-class tourist destination in the state’s largest city and an employment training center in New Haven, the state’s second city, is of dubious worth.

Let’s say that a plan for a tribal satellite casino in an empty Showcase Cinemas in East Windsor, (pop. 11,162) and home to the Connecticut Trolley Museum, is far more advantageous to the economic fortunes of Connecticut.

Nevertheless, why does the MGM plan not even get a look by the elected representatives of the people of Connecticut?

Sure the architects’ renderings of the MGM plan — and of the Mashantucket Pequot and Mohegan joint venture in East Windsor, by the way — are enticing in an air-brushed sort of way.

But beyond the shimmering images, underlying this whole discussion of casinos in Connecticut, is a fundamental issue: fairness.

In 1993 — the smartphone had not yet been invented — then-Gov. Lowell P. Weicker Jr. committed Connecticut to an agreement with the state’s two federally recognized Native American tribes that let gaming flourish on tribal land. And the East Windsor site is not on tribal land.

The agreement gave the tribes exclusive rights in return for 25 percent of slot machine revenues.

It may have been a beneficial deal for all.

Twenty-four years later, though, it requires no great leap of reasoning to suggest the agreement deserves revisiting.

Why should MGM — or anyone else, for that matter — be summarily excluded from offering a proposl? State law says so. The legislature needs to change that law.

Does Connecticut, in regard to any other industry, exercise this discriminatory exclusion? If so, there’s more the legislature needs to dig into.

Considering this proposal could not be more timely: The legislature is still in session, precisely because of the state’s budgetary predicament, and the $50 million check for a gaming license is on the table.

Furthermore, major corporate entities have begun a distressing pattern in Connecticut: They are leaving.

MGM is a Fortune 300 company that wants to pay $50 million for the privilege of coming here. James J. Murren — coincidentally a Bridgeport native — MGM Resorts’chairman and chief executive officer, came to Bridgeport Monday to punctuate the desire to be in Bridgeport.

It would be good if we could describe the MGM and tribal plans as “competing plans.” But MGM, as things stand, is not allowed to even compete.

So, let’s say if there’s to be a third casino in Connecticut, let’s have a fair, honest competition.